Hi
On Saturday 14 August 2010 at 2:58:24 PM, in <mid:[email protected]>, Jim Kyle wrote: > Test for On--- On Saturday, August 14, 2010, at > 7:54:53 AM, MFPA wrote: >> Why? What happens if you right-click the folder where >> you need to move the messages from and select >> "re-filter..."? > Nothing at all, since the filters for routing those > messages are associated with another account. I thought operating them manually worked regardless of account. My memory must be at fault. I converted all mine to common filters a couple of years ago, and manually re-filtering messages in a folder takes no notice of whether the common filter is "shared with" the account that folder belongs to. >> I see nothing strange. Whatever account has focus is >> active. If a common or virtual folder has focus, no >> account is active. > That exactly describes what I see here, but the program > did not act this way with the older version that I used > for years. The old action was that this checkbox > determined which account would be used for server > access and had nothing to do with focus. It defaulted > to the account checked off as the "mailto" one, but > could be changed manually from the pop-up. I have never had any account ticked as the default for mailto. When I click a mailto URL, or when no account has focus and I create a new message or reply or forward (eg I'm in a common folder or virtual folder), a dialogue box appears for me to pick which account to use. When an account has focus, that one is used unless a macro in my template selects a different one or I change it manually. For receiving mail, the mailto default is irrelevant for server access. If focus is on an account and I select "get new mail" that account connects to its server if any is defined. If focus is on a common folder or virtual folder, "get new mail" is greyed out. If I change the "active account" by clicking on the left hand end of the status bar and selecting a different one from the pop-up menu, focus changes to that account. I usually use "Send + Check for All" to connect to the servers to collect my mail. This connects to the servers I have configured in the account settings for all my accounts, except where I have selected "Ignore 'Check All Accounts' request" in the account's properties. > The current > action makes it essentially useless since it offers no > information not already on the screen because of the > focus. This may be related to some other setting(s) that neither of us has considered, but what you now see is what I have experienced since I started using TB! version 2 in 2004. > Incidentally, I looked at the pop-up while typing this > reply, which is working in my "tbudlacct" account. None > of the three is checked. In my message editor window my correct account is selected for this reply. In my TB! main window the status bar is completely blank unless I move focus to a different account or to a common or virtual folder. > The reason for having a separate account for tbudl is > to have no numbering of replies when messaging here. My > normal account does number the replies, but folk > objected to that happening on the list -- and since > numbering is controlled at the account level, not by > the template in use, the separate account was > necessary. In my experience, the macro "%SINGLERE" in a reply template over-rides the option in account settings to "Use reply numbering in the subject line." Of course, you use a newer version of TB! and that may no longer be true. >> If you are creating "accounts" that will neither send >> nor receive mail, I have to wonder if your purpose >> might be better served by instead creating folders >> under your one account that actually sends and >> receives. > The tbudlacct must be able to send, but it need not > receive since the filter on the normal account will > direct incoming messages to it properly. The problem is > that messages to other recipients are sent from it with > no warning, unless I check the active account item > before replying. > If there are now macros that I can add to templates > that will force my desired routing, I'd definitely be > willing to use them! That is, all traffic to or from > tbudl should use tbudlacct while all other traffic > should use the account "web" I think putting your TBUDL folder under your "web" account and using "%SINGLERE" in your TBUDL reply template should be all that you need. If you wish to keep a separate account for tbudl outgoing messages, you should also add "%ACCOUNT='tbudlacct' to all your TBUDL templates. If your TBUDL account is collecting incoming mail from the same server as your "web" account and this is mucking up your filtering, I would suggest one of three approaches:- (A) don't define any incoming server in your TBUDL account, and select "Ignore 'Check All Accounts' request" in the account's properties. (B) convert all your incoming filters to common filters covering all accounts. (C) set up two incoming filters in your TBUDL account - the first to move TBUDL messages as required and *not* to continue processing with other filters, the second to move all messages to the inbox of your "web" account. > (the third account is for > a service on different servers that I no longer track > daily, but merely check manually every week or two). If this service cannot be set to forward incoming messages to your newer service, why not configure TB! to automatically do this occasional checking? Periodic checking can be set in account properties at intervals as long as 60000 minutes, which is nearly 6 weeks. > Thanks for the comments and suggestions! I hope something I have said may be of use. -- Best regards MFPA mailto:[email protected] He's an environmentalist - his arguments are 100% recycled Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 ________________________________________________ Current version is 4.2.23 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
